Instead of the original 25. Really? Every time I think Gary Bettman has a clue he does something completely asinine like this. What the hell difference is 25 vs. 21 games and is it any way enough to override your league disciplinarian over 4 games? Just stupid, IMO.

Based on severity I guess I get it, but i'm not sure how you can agree with lowering his suspension. Repeat offender, pretty clear hit to the head, and a near complete reversal of the NHL's position at the time of the suspension:

Should the 25 games not be served by the conclusion of the 2012 Stanley Cup Playoffs, the remaining games of the suspension will carry over into the following regular season. Torres will be prohibited from playing in any preseason games until he has served this 25-game suspension (playoff and regular-season games).Should the suspension carry over to next season, because he is classified as a repeat offender under the Collective Bargaining Agreement, Torres will forfeit $21,341.46 in salary for every regular-season game in which he is ineligible to play.

Idoit40fans wrote:I agree with lowering it because it was excessive. It couldn't possibly be more simple.

Simple? The NHL rallies against hits to the head for 2 years, overreacts to a vicious hit to a star player by a repeat offender in the playoffs, makes a clear example of him publicly and directly, then Bettman overrules the disciplinary committee admitting they overreacted and the penalty was excessive, reduces it by what is essentially an arbitrary number of games, thereby opening the door to appeal any long-term suspension here forward as a similar overreaction, and your position is that it couldn't be more simple?

Idoit40fans wrote:I agree with lowering it because it was excessive. It couldn't possibly be more simple.

Simple? The NHL rallies against hits to the head for 2 years, overreacts to a vicious hit to a star player by a repeat offender in the playoffs, makes a clear example of him publicly and directly, then Bettman overrules the disciplinary committee admitting they overreacted and the penalty was excessive, reduces it by what is essentially an arbitrary number of games, thereby opening the door to appeal any long-term suspension here forward as a similar overreaction, and your position is that it couldn't be more simple?

Its a political move by Bettman. It has little to do with excess.

No, my position couldn't be more simple. And it has everything to do with excess. It was longer than most other suspensions handed out and was handed out during the playoffs. The original suspension was political and an overreaction. The adjustment was reasonable.

Idoit40fans wrote:I agree with lowering it because it was excessive. It couldn't possibly be more simple.

Simple? The NHL rallies against hits to the head for 2 years, overreacts to a vicious hit to a star player by a repeat offender in the playoffs, makes a clear example of him publicly and directly, then Bettman overrules the disciplinary committee admitting they overreacted and the penalty was excessive, reduces it by what is essentially an arbitrary number of games, thereby opening the door to appeal any long-term suspension here forward as a similar overreaction, and your position is that it couldn't be more simple?

Its a political move by Bettman. It has little to do with excess.

No, my position couldn't be more simple. And it has everything to do with excess. It was longer than most other suspensions handed out and was handed out during the playoffs. The original suspension was political and an overreaction. The adjustment was reasonable.

I'd say Torres earned every game of that excessive suspension with his body of work over the years. The guy is a scumbag; it's amazing that Cooke gets all the bad press and Torres continues to play just as dirty a game as he ever did.

Idoit40fans wrote:I agree with lowering it because it was excessive. It couldn't possibly be more simple.

Simple? The NHL rallies against hits to the head for 2 years, overreacts to a vicious hit to a star player by a repeat offender in the playoffs, makes a clear example of him publicly and directly, then Bettman overrules the disciplinary committee admitting they overreacted and the penalty was excessive, reduces it by what is essentially an arbitrary number of games, thereby opening the door to appeal any long-term suspension here forward as a similar overreaction, and your position is that it couldn't be more simple?

Its a political move by Bettman. It has little to do with excess.

No, my position couldn't be more simple. And it has everything to do with excess. It was longer than most other suspensions handed out and was handed out during the playoffs. The original suspension was political and an overreaction. The adjustment was reasonable.

The adjustment was an equal, opposite political overreaction. This is why no one trusts the NHL, including the PA, to do the right thing...